Sen. Eric Schmitt said the Department of Justice should move aggressively against California and Illinois over redistricting maps he said were built around race-based criteria after a recent Supreme Court ruling.

The comments came during an exchange with Andrew Kolvet, who asked Schmitt about California’s redistricting and the possibility that the state’s map could face legal problems after the ruling.

“California, so they redistrict their maps, they get about five seats for the Democrats,” Kolvet said.

“You have raised that there might be some problems based on the Supreme Court ruling. Senator, what's your perspective there?” Kolvet asked.

Here's What They're Not Telling You About Your Retirement

Schmitt said the case could carry major consequences for Democratic redistricting advantages.

“Yeah, I think this is a, an underreported story, just how significant this case was at the Supreme Court about a month ago,” Schmitt said.

Schmitt said the ruling affects how Democrats have relied on district maps.

“Effectively, what they said is the Democrats can't rely on this astroturf number of seats they have by way of racist maps, you can't racially gerrymander maps, and the Democrats have been doing this for a very, very long time,” Schmitt said.

This Could Be the Most Important Video Gun Owners Watch All Year

Schmitt said he has pushed the Department of Justice to target states, including California and Illinois.

“I've encouraged the Department of Justice to go after states like California, Illinois, that have been very explicit as to what their rationale for why they have the maps that they have,” Schmitt said.

He said California created a commission that was presented as nonpartisan, but he argued it produced maps favorable to Democrats.

“California has this commission that they created, which, by the way, was set up under the guise of nonpartisanship to make it more democratic maps,” Schmitt said.

Schmitt said Democrats now want to move beyond that system.

“Now that's not radical enough for them, they want to toss that and get to another system,” Schmitt said.

He said the issue is tied to how districts were created.

“But be that as it may, their chief map maker has been clear that they created districts based on race,” Schmitt said.

Schmitt said a letter was sent to the Department of Justice urging legal action against California.

“And so Hermit Dylan, the Department of Justice, we've issued a letter to them, encouraged them to sue the state of California and upend a racist map, and they ought to do it in Illinois too,” Schmitt said.

Schmitt said Illinois also uses race-based criteria in its redistricting law.

“Illinois sets up in their statute criteria that's based explicitly on race,” Schmitt said.

“The Supreme Court's been clear, you can't do that,” Schmitt said.

Schmitt said the issue should be viewed alongside other expected political and demographic changes.

“I think what we're about to see, that if you zoom out here, Andrew, if we are successful in that effort, the Democrats have relied on illegal immigrants padding their numbers,” Schmitt said.

He pointed to deportations, census changes, and movement from blue states to red states.

“We're successful with deportations, you do that, and then also just the natural redistricting that's going to happen,” Schmitt said.

“2020 was a bogus census, the 2030 census will be more accurate, and also the people leaving California, Illinois, New York for red states,” Schmitt said.

Schmitt said those changes could produce political advantages for Republican-led states.

“You're going to see a fundamental shift, I think, structurally, where we're going to have advantages in states in a big way in the next five years,” Schmitt said.

He called for an aggressive legal approach.

“But we ought to be aggressive here. We ought to do pedal to the metal and upend these racist maps,” Schmitt said.

“That's what the Supreme Court ruling is all about. And now they should play offense,” Schmitt said.

Kolvet then asked whether Schmitt had received any indication that the DOJ would act.

“I love this. I mean, so have you gotten any word back from the DOJ that they're actually going to pursue this?” Kolvet asked.

Kolvet pointed to Schmitt’s legal background as Missouri’s former attorney general and his work involving Google and censorship.

“And I want to, I want to remind the audience here, you are the former Attorney General of the state of Missouri,” Kolvet said.

“You are the guy that led the fight against Google and censorship,” Kolvet said.

“We have so many scalps thanks to your leadership, and so you know this well,” Kolvet said.

Kolvet said Schmitt’s legal argument was grounded in his background.

“I mean, you are a legal beagle in the truest sense,” Kolvet said.

“You happen to be in the Senate now, and you're fighting the fight for us, but, like, I just want the audience to understand, when you, when you bring up these legal issues, you're not talking into a vacuum, you're not talking unaware about the legal precedents that have been set,” Kolvet said.

Kolvet asked whether the Justice Department agreed with Schmitt’s position.

“Have you gotten confirmation that they're looking into it, that this is that they agree with your prescription here?” Kolvet asked.

Schmitt said he posted about the letter on X after it was issued to the Justice Department.

“Well, I posted about it when we, when we issued the letter to the Department of Justice, posted about it on X,” Schmitt said.

He said Harmeet Dhillon responded to the post.

“And Harmeet Dhillon's response was 'on it,' so I think that's a good sign,” Schmitt said.

WATCH:

Doing Something About It: Louisiana US Senate Primary | The Rob Maness Show EP 672

The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of LifeZette. Contact us for guidelines on submitting your own commentary.